1 2025:CGHC:51856 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8434 of 2025 Shyam Nayak S/o Subhash Nayak Aged About 23 Years R/o Ganesh Nagar Nayapara, Sirgitti, Police Station Sirgitti, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Sirgitti, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Shashank Upadhyay, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Deputy Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order On Board 17/10/2025 1. Applicant has filed this second bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “ BNSS”) for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.351 of 2023 registered at Police Station –Sirgitti, District- Bilaspur (CG) for offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149 ,302, 34 of IPC and Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act. First bail application of the present applicant was dismissed on merits by this Court vide order dated 26.07.2024 by this Court in MCRC No. 4073 of 2024. ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2025.10.17 17:12:07 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 16.05.2023 at about 6:00 P.M., Monu @ Pawan Soni was standing in front of Betel Shop (Pan Shop) of Pintu Yadav, at that relevant point of time, Ramu Yadav along with 12 other co- accused persons came there armed with sharp edged weapons and club and have started assaulting the deceased Pawan Soni due to which, he suffered injuries over his person and succumbed to his injuries on the spot. The incident was reported to the concerned police station, upon which, aforementioned crime was registered and the applicant was arrested on 17.05.2023. 3. Learned counsel for applicant would submit that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that after dismissal of first bail application on merits, material witnesses have now been examined and they have not supported the case of prosecution, so far as relates to applicant. He also submits that case of the prosecution is that there are 04 eye witnesses namely Ajay Yadav, Pintu Yadav, Suresh Soni(father of deceased) and Akash Dhruv. All the eye witnesses have now been examined and they have not named the applicant who have participated in the crime. Copy of the deposition of witnesses Suresh Soni (PW-01), Saroj Soni (PW-02)/(mother of deceased), Pintu Yadav (PW-07) and Akash Dhruv (PW-09) is enclosed along with the bail application. Applicant is in jail since 18.05.2023 hence has completed more than two years pre-trial detention period. Hence he may be enlarged on bail. He lastly pointed out that on identical facts of the case, one Santosh Yadav and Irfan Khan where enlarged on bail by this Court in MCRC No. 5403/2023 and MCRC 6660/2023 respectively. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the submission made by learned counsel for applicant and would submit that during the course of investigation, based on the memorandum statement of the co- accused. Blood stain clothes of the applicant, one shawl and wooden stick has been seized and as per the FSL report it has been reported to be human blood. 3 5.At this stage, counsel for the applicant would submit that seizure witnesses have now been examined and they have not supported the case of the prosecution. 6.I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents placed along with this bail application. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission made by learned counsel for the respective parties, period of pre-trial detention, and also that on identical facts of the case, other two co-accused have been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 5403/2023 and MCRC 6660/2023 vide order dated 11.07.2025 and 09.09.2025 respectively, without commenting anything on merits of case, I am inclined to allow the application. 8.Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of ₹ 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that- (a) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (b) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through him counsel. In case of him absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (c) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings 4 against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (d) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Certified copy as per rules. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) alfiza JUDGE